Am I the only one that think it's rather tragic that he cites a feature of the game as "you can lose..."?
Have games really got so easy?
[QUOTE=lee-pat;36260618]Am I the only one that think it's rather tragic that he cites a feature of the game as "you can lose..."?
Have games really got so easy?[/QUOTE]
Well there aren't many games where you can actually lose. Dying and reloading a checkpoint is not losing.
[QUOTE=lee-pat;36260618]Am I the only one that think it's rather tragic that he cites a feature of the game as "you can lose..."?
Have games really got so easy?[/QUOTE]
A lot of people keep bringing this up and, using the valuable teachings of 4th grade reading lessons, the context clues seem to indicate that it's a mission that if you happen to fail or run out of dudes it's just over and you progress with the story.
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;36254733]No because not every sequel just takes the shitty BF2 single player and puts it in between their usual shitty sp levels and then calls it something new.
I love how people think there is somehow a difference and that Treyarch makes better quality but the truth is ever since they started, as a company, they've made nothing but garbage sequels and not a single original idea came out of them, ever.[/QUOTE]
(Sarcasm)
[editline]9th June 2012[/editline]
It's hard to believe you could say they've come up with nothing original. You must be completely unaware of Nazi zombies and everything else awesome in World at War and Black Ops. "Nothing but garbage sequels". As far as I know, this is the first sequel to Black Ops.
Oh yeah, and Nazi Zombies? So unoriginal and incredibly stupid, correct? Treyarch totally did NOT make a name for themselves after that and they were 100% unsuccessful. Totally.
No the first sequel they made for CoD was Big Red One, one of the worst shooters on last gens consoles that I can think of, after which they made CoD 3, that bland shit that came in between two pretty great games.
They took a gamemode that's been around in every big mp shooter since Halo 2 and put it in CoD WOW good job! Except of adding features they made all the zombies AI and apparently this was some hot shit to people who buy sports games each year they come out. Treyarch has spent its entire existence either making ports or sequels that are put together really poorly and people eat that shit up.
[QUOTE=Silikone;36231801]This is cool and all, but a part of me fears that the whole RTS genre is at risk of becoming consolized.[/QUOTE]
It won't have any effect on the PC you elitist twat.
[QUOTE=Silikone;36231801]This is cool and all, but a part of me fears that the whole RTS genre is at risk of becoming consolized.[/QUOTE]
Yes, because one game with a few RTS elements=whole genre getting "consolized".
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;36254733]No because not every sequel just takes the shitty BF2 single player and puts it in between their usual shitty sp levels and then calls it something new.
I love how people think there is somehow a difference and that Treyarch makes better quality but the truth is ever since they started, as a company, they've made nothing but garbage sequels and not a single original idea came out of them, ever.[/QUOTE]
uhhhhhh last time I checked BF2 didnt have single player. im looking at the case now and nowhere on it says single player. and the customization in blops was pretty damn cool and original.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;36260244]Favela on Veteran in MW2.[/QUOTE]
Agh, that one too
Wait, A new CoD game, That looks good. Gah, Now I have to go protect my house from flying pigs
Press x to plant network intruder
[QUOTE=codemaster85;36266310]uhhhhhh last time I checked BF2 didnt have single player. im looking at the case now and nowhere on it says single player. and the customization in blops was pretty damn cool and original.[/QUOTE]
BF2 [I]Modern Combat[/I]
[QUOTE=POLOPOZOZO;36266500]BF2 [I]Modern Combat[/I][/QUOTE]
thats definitively not battlefield 2 that most people think of. be more clear next time.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
